1

2.2.2.3 Proposed Variance Areas for Utility-Scale Solar Energy Development

2

3

To accommodate the flexibility described in the BLM’s program objectives, the program

4

alternative allows for responsible utility-scale solar development outside of SEZs. The BLM

5

proposes to identify lands outside of proposed exclusion areas and SEZs as variance areas for

6

utility-scale solar energy development. Variance areas would be open to application but would

7

require developers to adhere to the proposed variance process (detailed in Section 2.2.2.3.1).

8

Final Solar PEIS

2-43

July 2012

8

should understand that their financial commitments in connection with their applications will

9

not be a factor in the BLM’s evaluation process.

10

11

Required Preliminary Meetings

12

13

33

34

• Lands within an SEZ are sufficient to meet the potential applicant’s needs,

35

including adequate access to available transmission.

36

37

• The proposed project will be in conflict with landscape conservation strategies

38

and/or landscape protection, conservation, or restoration objectives

39

established in documents such as the DRECP or an applicable RMP.

40

41

• The proposed project poses a high potential for conflict with sensitive natural,

42

visual, and/or cultural resources identified by the BLM, NPS, and/or USFWS.

43

44

Final Solar PEIS

2-44

July 2012

1

ROW Applications in Variance Areas – Process

2

3

Following completion of the preliminary meetings described above, an applicant seeking

23

ROW Applications in Variance Areas – Factors To Be Considered

24

38

39

• The availability of lands in an SEZ that could meet the applicant’s needs,

40

including adequate access to available transmission.

41

42

• Documentation that the proposed project will be in conformance with

43

decisions in current land use plan(s) (e.g., visual resource management class

44

designations and seasonal restrictions) or, if necessary, represents an

45

acceptable proposal for a land use plan amendment.

46

Final Solar PEIS

2-45

July 2012

2

conservation, restoration, and/or adaptation objectives in best available

3

landscape-scale information (e.g., landscape conservation cooperatives, rapid

4

ecological assessments, and state and regional-level crucial habitat assessment

5

tools [CHATs]).

6

8

design features adopted in the Solar PEIS ROD (see Section A.2.2 of

9

Appendix A).

10

11

• Documentation that the applicant has coordinated with state and local (county

12

and/or municipal) governments, including consideration of consistency with

13

officially adopted plans and policies (e.g., comprehensive land use plans, open

14

space plans, and conservation plans) and permit requirements (e.g., special use

15

permits).

16

17

• Documentation of the financial and technical capability of the applicant,

18

including, but not limited to:

19

International or domestic experience with solar projects on either federal

20

or nonfederal lands,

21

Sufficient capitalization to carry out development, monitoring, and

22

decommissioning, including the preliminary study phase of the project

23

and the environmental review and clearance process.

24

25

• Documentation that the proposed project is in an area with low or

26

comparatively low resource conflicts and where conflicts can be resolved

27

(as demonstrated through many of the factors that follow).

28

29

• Documentation that the proposed project will minimize the need to build new

30

roads.

31

32

• Documentation that the proposed project will meet one or more of the

33

following transmission sub-criteria: (1) transmission with existing capacity

34

and substations is already available; (2) lands are adjacent to designated

35

transmission corridors; (3) only incremental transmission is needed

36

(e.g., re-conductoring or network upgrades and development of substations);

37

or (4) new transmission upgrades or additions to serve the area have been

38

permitted or are reasonably expected to be permitted in time to serve the

39

generation project.

40

41

• Documentation that the proposed project will make efficient use of the land

42

considering the solar resource, the technology to be used, and the proposed

43

project layout.

44

45

• If applicable, documentation that the proposed project will be located in an

46

area identified as suitable for solar energy development in an applicable BLM

Final Solar PEIS

2-46

July 2012

1

land use plan and/or by another related process such as the California DRECP

2

(e.g., Development Focus Areas) or Arizona RDEP (e.g., REDAs).

3

5

expansion or repowering of an existing project or unique interagency

6

partnership.

7

9

optimum siting (e.g., combining BLM-administered land with adjacent

10

previously disturbed private lands).

11

12

• If applicable, documentation that the proposed project will be located in, or

13

adjacent to, previously contaminated or disturbed lands such as brownfields

14

identified by the EPA’s RE-Powering America’s Land Initiative

15

(http://www.epa.gov/renewableenergyland); mechanically altered lands such

16

as mine-scarred lands and fallowed agricultural lands; idle or underutilized

17

industrial areas; lands adjacent to urbanized areas and/or load centers; or areas

18

repeatedly burned and invaded by fire-promoting non-native grasses where

19

the probability of restoration is determined to be limited.

20

21

• Documentation that the proposed project will minimize adverse impacts on

22

access and recreational opportunities on public lands (including hunting,

23

fishing, and other fishand wildlife-related activities).

24

25

• Documentation that the proposed project will minimize adverse impacts on

26

important fish and wildlife habitats and migration/movement corridors

27

(e.g., utilizing the Western Wildlife CHAT, administered by the Western

28

Governor’s Wildlife Council [http://www.westgov.org/wildlife/380-chat]

29

and coordinating with state fish and wildlife agencies).

30

31

• Documentation that the proposed project will be designed, constructed, and

32

operated to use the best available technology for limiting water use that is

33

applicable to the specific generation technology.

34

35

• Documentation that any groundwater withdrawal associated with a proposed

36

project will not cause or contribute to withdrawals over the perennial yield of

37

the basin, or cause an adverse effect on ESA-listed or other special status

38

species or their habitats over the long term. However, where groundwater

39

extraction may affect groundwater-dependent ecosystems, and especially

40

within groundwater basins that have been overappropriated by state water

41

resource agencies, an application may be acceptable if commitments are made

42

to provide mitigation measures that will provide a net benefit to that specific

43

groundwater resource over the duration of the project. Determination of

44

impacts on groundwater will likely require applicants to undertake

45

hydrological studies using available data and accepted models.

46

Final Solar PEIS

2-47

July 2012

2

donated or acquired for conservation purposes, or mitigation lands identified

3

in previously approved projects such as translocation areas for desert tortoise.

4

6

should not occur as a result of the proposed project (i.e., exceedance of an

7

established threshold such as air quality standards).

8

• Desert Tortoise

9

10

11

Designated desert tortoise conservation areas will be excluded from BLM’s

12

proposed Solar Energy Program (see Section 2.2.2.1). These areas include, but

13

are not limited to, critical habitat for desert tortoise and specially designated

14

areas such as BLM-designated ACECs that specifically identified desert

15

tortoise as one of the Relevant and Important Values, National Parks, National

16

Recreation Areas, and NWRs.

17

18

The USFWS has identified certain other areas that may be important for desert

19

tortoise connectivity (i.e., priority desert connectivity habitat). Recovering

20

desert tortoises throughout their range requires that conservation areas be

21

connected by habitat linkages in which tortoises reside and reproduce. Such

22

areas will need to be free of large-scale impediments from anthropogenic

23

activities. Since publication of the Supplement to the Draft Solar PEIS, the

24

BLM is proposing to exclude from the proposed Solar Energy Program an

25

additional 515,000 acres (2,084 km2) of land that coincides with priority

26

desert tortoise connectivity habitat (see Table 2.2-2, Exclusion 32).

27

28

Maps and supporting information regarding priority desert tortoise

29

connectivity habitat will be made available through the Solar PEIS project

30

Web site (http://solareis.anl.gov).6 Developers that propose utility-scale solar

31

energy projects in variance areas that overlap priority desert tortoise

32

connectivity habitat identified on USFWS maps will be required to meet with

33

the BLM and USFWS early in the process as part of the previously mentioned

34

preliminary meetings to receive instructions on the appropriate desert tortoise

35

survey protocols and the criteria the BLM and USFWS will use to evaluate

36

results of those surveys (see outline below). Applicants will be required to

37

work with the BLM and USFWS to survey an appropriately sized area (which

38

may be 3 to 4 times larger than the proposed project area) in an attempt to find

39

a suitable project location or configuration that minimizes impacts on desert

Final Solar PEIS

2-48

July 2012

1

tortoises. The BLM and USFWS will discourage applications in the highest

2

priority areas given anticipated high conflict, higher survey costs, and high

3

mitigation requirements.

4

Tortoise density and distribution surveys. Desert tortoise density and

5

distribution surveys will be conducted consistent with approved survey

6

protocols (http://www.fws.gov/ventura/species_information/

7

protocols_guidelines/index.html) and will be conducted by USFWS-

8

approved desert tortoise authorized biologists unless the USFWS

9

determines authorized biologists are unnecessary(http://www.fws.gov/

10

ventura/ species information/protocols_guidelines/index.html). The

11

spacing and intensity of surveys will be determined in consultation with

12

the BLM and USFWS. Two consecutive survey passes of the potential

13

project development area will be surveyed with the transects in the second

14

pass oriented 90 degrees from those walked in the first pass. Once a

15

refined project site has been selected within the larger survey area,

16

additional surveys could be recommended to ensure effective avoidance

17

of desert tortoises.

18

Habitat quality analyses. Evaluate the presence and condition of native

19

vegetation communities (including herbaceous plants), soils, and so forth

20

in the survey area.

21

Tortoise connectivity studies. The methodologies for connectivity studies

22

must be approved by the BLM and USFWS and peer-reviewed by an

23

accredited scientist prior to data collection. A first study should

24

demonstrate that the linkage area and adjacent Tortoise Conservation

25

Areas (TCAs) contain suitable tortoise habitat of sufficient size to support

26

desert tortoise populations. If sufficient habitat is present, a second study

27

should demonstrate that demographic and genetic connections can be

28

maintained once the proposed project is developed. This should include

29

evaluating existing barriers to connectivity and opportunities for tortoise-

30

to-tortoise interactions at a local and regional scale and the availability of

31

“live-in habitat.”

32

Corridor width evaluation. Using the site-specific data collected, including

33

desert tortoise density and distribution (from protocol surveys), habitat

34

quality analysis, and the desert tortoise connectivity evaluation, an

35

applicant should identify corridors that will adequately maintain the

36

connectivity around the proposed project. Such corridors must be

37

approved by the BLM and USFWS.

38

Survey for areas suitable for tortoise translocation if applicable.

39

40

In evaluating information provided by an applicant, the BLM and USFWS

41

will consider cumulative effects and landscape-level information consistent

42

with desert tortoise recovery goals and objectives and best available science to

43

determine if a project will result in acceptable impacts on desert tortoise. The

44

applicant must provide documentation to the satisfaction of the BLM and

45

USFWS of the following, unless a project is otherwise determined by the

46

BLM and USFWS to have acceptable impacts on desert tortoise:

Final Solar PEIS

2-49

July 2012

1

The project can be sited and constructed to allow for adequate

2

connectivity corridors as determined by the BLM and USFWS that

3

ensure that the project does not isolate or fragment tortoise habitat and

4

populations;

5

The proposed site contains low tortoise densities consistent with best

6

available information for the subject geographic area, including data on

7

local desert tortoise densities, when available, and data from the long-term

8

USFWS rangewide monitoring of the Mojave Population of the desert

9

tortoise (http://www.fws.gov/nevada/desert_tortoise/dt_reports.html);

10

The project will result in minimal translocation of adult and sub-adult

11

tortoise to acceptable locations (>160 mm Midline Carapace Length) as

12

determined by the BLM and USFWS7;

13

Any necessary mitigation will improve conditions within the connectivity

14

area, and if these options do not exist, necessary mitigation will be applied

15

toward the nearest tortoise conservation area (e.g., ACEC for which

16

tortoise had been identified in the Relevant and Important Criteria or

17

critical habitat); and

18

A plan is in place to effectively monitor desert tortoise impacts, including

19

verification that desert tortoise connectivity corridors are functional. The

20

required ESA consultation will further define this monitoring plan.

21

• Greater Sage-Grouse

22

23

24

Greater sage-grouse habitat (i.e., currently occupied, brooding, and winter

25

habitat) as identified by the BLM in California, Nevada, and Utah will be

26

excluded from BLM’s proposed Solar Energy Program (see Section 2.2.2.1).

27

28

Developers that propose utility-scale solar energy projects in variance areas

29

that overlap the range of the greater sage-grouse, will be required to provide

30

documentation of the following, unless a project is otherwise determined by

31

the BLM and USFWS and appropriate state wildlife agencies to have

32

acceptable impacts on greater sage-grouse8:

33

Project is at least 4 mi (6 km) from the nearest lek;

34

Project will not adversely affect Preliminary Priority Habitat; and

35

Project will be mitigated through land acquisition or habitat enhancement

36

at a ratio of at least 1:1 for any impact on Preliminary General Habitat as

37

determined by accepted standards of habitat analysis (e.g., habitat

Final Solar PEIS

2-50

July 2012

1

equivalency analysis [HEA]) and in coordination with the USFWS and the

2

appropriate state wildlife agencies.

3

5

Other Special Status Areas under National Park Service Administration

6

7

The construction and operation of utility-scale solar energy projects and

8

related transmission infrastructure near units of the National Park System and

9

other special areas administered by the NPS, including National Historic

10

Trails, may significantly affect park programs, resources, and values. For

11

example, ecological resources (such as habitat and migration of species) and

12

physical resources (such as wind, water, air, and scenic views) cross park

13

boundaries, and park boundaries often do not represent all of the natural

14

resources, cultural sites, and scenic vistas that make up resources and the

15

quality of the park visitor’s experience in these special places.

16

17

The NPS has identified areas within the proposed variance areas where utility-

18

scale solar development poses a high potential for conflict with the natural,

19

cultural, and/or visual resources administered by the NPS. Since publication

20

of the Supplement to the Draft Solar PEIS, the BLM is proposing to exclude

21

from the proposed Solar Energy Program an additional 821,000 acres

22

(3,322 km2) of land that coincides with NPS-identified areas of high-potential

23

conflict (see Table 2.2-2, Exclusion 32).

24

25

Maps and data documenting areas of high-potential conflict with National

26

Parks, historic trails, and other areas under NPS administration will be made

27

available through the Solar PEIS project Web site (http://solareis.anl.gov).9

28

This information will promote public awareness and notify industry where

29

additional documentation may be required to proceed with an application in

30

variance areas. The maps and data are regarded as a first-order approximation

31

of landscape-scale conditions and potential resource conflict and will be

32

updated as new information and analytical tools are developed.

33

34

The BLM will utilize these maps and data in the screening of proposed solar

35

energy projects in variance areas (these data may also be useful in evaluating

36

projects in SEZs as well, see Section 2.2.2.2.2). In cases where a utility-scale

37

solar energy development ROW application is submitted in a variance area

38

identified as having a high potential for conflict with the resources of a unit of

Final Solar PEIS

2-51

July 2012

1

the National Park System or special areas administered by the NPS, additional

2

documentation will be required. This documentation may include information

3

to verify any or all of the following potential resource conditions resulting

4

from the proposed project:

5

Increased loading of fine particulates (criteria pollutants: PM 2.5 and

6

PM10 [particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 µm or less and 10 µm or

7

less, respectively]) and reduced visibility in Class I and sensitive Class II

8

areas;

9

Vulnerability of sensitive cultural sites and landscapes, loss of historical

10

interpretative value due to destruction or vandalism;

11

Altered frequency and magnitude of floods, and water quantity and

12

quality;

13

Reduced habitat quality and integrity and wildlife movement and/or

14

migration corridors; increased isolation and mortality of key species;

15

Fragmentation of natural landscapes;

16

Diminished wilderness, scenic viewsheds, and night sky values on

17

landscapes within and beyond boundaries of areas administered by the

18

NPS; and

19

Diminished cultural landscape qualities within and beyond boundaries

20

administered by the NPS.

21

22

The documentation provided by an applicant must be sufficiently detailed as

23

determined by the BLM and NPS. The documentation should represent the

24

findings of science and the analyses of scientifically trained specialists in the

25

appropriate natural, visual, and/or cultural resource disciplines. The NPS will

26

prepare a response to the BLM as to (1) whether the proposed project meets

27

NPS protection, conservation, and/or restoration objectives; and (2) whether

28

the resource conflict documentation is adequate to support a finding by the

29

NPS and BLM that the proposed project is likely to avoid a high potential for

30

conflict with resources and values associated with a National Park or other

31

special status area under the administration of the NPS.

32

33

The NPS will continue to refine data for determining resource conflict and

34

provide this information to the BLM for use in the variance process. The

35

NPS will assist the BLM in identifying alternate project locations, if there is

36

insufficient information to verify potential resource conflict with sensitive

37

resources and values of National Park and other NPS special status areas. In

38

all cases, evaluations will be performed to ensure that natural, visual, and

39

cultural resources of units of the National Park System and other special areas

40

administered by the NPS are protected.

41

42

Public Outreach

43

44

Final Solar PEIS

2-52

July 2012

7

variance areas available to the public online via the BLM Web site (www.blm.gov) and the Solar

8

PEIS project Web site (http://solareis.anl.gov).

9

10

BLM Coordination Activities

11

12

19

• Consultation with tribes. Government-to-government consultation with tribal

20

staff will provide opportunities for tribes to identify traditional cultural

21

properties and sacred sites with applications in variance areas. Tribes will be

22

invited to attend pre-application meetings with the applicant and the BLM. On

23

the basis of information and discussions arising from the pre-application

24

meetings, the BLM will determine whether there is a need for new

25

ethnographic research to provide sufficient information to adequately consider

26

the effects of solar development on issues and resources of concern to tribes.

27

BLM field office cultural staff, including specialists assigned to Renewable

28

Energy Coordination Offices where present, in consultation with their Deputy

29

Preservation Officer, shall recommend to responsible BLM line officers

30

whether to collect additional ethnographic data for a given solar application.

31

Should new ethnographic research, studies, or interviews be recommended,

32

the BLM cultural staff, in consultation with tribal officials, will provide

33

guidance to BLM line officers about the appropriate scope of that work,

34

provisions for safeguarding data confidentiality, and programs of mitigation.

35

36

• Coordination with the SHPO. The BLM will consult with the SHPO to

37

determine the steps required to identify historic properties in the area of effect

38

for the ROW application. Additional inventories may include Class II or Class

39

III surveys in areas of direct and indirect effect depending on the potential for

40

impacts. On the basis of the results of the inventory, determinations of

41

eligibility of sites to the NRHP, determinations of effect, and programs of

42

mitigation would be approved by the BLM and carried out by the applicant

43

prior to ground disturbance.

44

45

• Coordination with state fish and wildlife agencies.

46

Final Solar PEIS

2-53

July 2012

2

California REAT agencies (BLM, USFWS, CDFG, and CEC) to ensure

3

consistency with any DRECP reserve and development area designs. The

4

REAT agencies will evaluate applications in areas proposed for development,

5

focus areas, and areas proposed for reserves on a case-by-case basis. The

6

REAT agencies will consider the best available information, including data

7

generated as part of the DRECP planning effort. The BLM may choose to

8

defer or modify projects on a case-by-case basis if it determines that approval

9

of the proposed project would harm resource values so as to limit the choice

10

of reasonable alternative actions in the DRECP (H-1601-1 – Land Use

11

Planning Handbook [BLM 2005]).

12

13

• Coordination with the NPS to assess the potential for impacts on the resources

14

and values of units of the National Park System and other special status areas

15

under NPS administration (e.g., National Scenic or Historic Trails).

16

17

• Coordination with the NPS, USFS, and/or the BLM National Trails System

18

Office charged with trail-wide administration or management for National

19

Scenic or Historic Trails to review inventory adequacy or needs, and to assess

20

potential adverse impacts on trails (see Section A.2.2.23 of Appendix A for

21

inventory requirements). Coordination is also required with the study agency

22

for trails recommended as suitable in congressionally authorized Trail

23

Feasibility Studies or trails undergoing such study. Coordination is also

24

required with nonprofit national trail organizations for trails subject to

25

exclusion provisions. Other related program coordination requirements must

26

also be met, such as for cultural resources, recreation and visitor services,

27

visual resources, or NLCS.

28

29

• Coordination with the USFWS on any application that could result in impacts

30

on ESA-listed species and their habitat (including, but not limited to, desert

31

tortoise and sage-grouse), bald and golden eagles, and migratory birds.

32

33

• Coordination with state and local (county and/or municipal) governments to

34

determine compatibility with officially adopted plans and policies

35

(e.g., comprehensive land use plans, open space plans, conservation plans)

36

and permit requirements (e.g., special use permits).

37

38

• Consultation with the DoD. The BLM will consult the DoD to minimize

39

and/or eliminate impacts on military operations and encourage compatible

40

development. This consultation will include both general discussions for early

41

planning and detailed assessments of specific proposals at the local level. The

42

BLM will accept formal DoD submissions once they have been vetted through

43

both the Military Departments and the DoD Siting Clearinghouse.

44

45

• Coordination with the USACE.

46

Final Solar PEIS

2-54

July 2012

1

• Coordination with the EPA.

2

4

(e.g., WGA, Nevada Renewable Energy Transmission Access Advisory

5

Committee, New Mexico Renewable Energy Transmission Authority),

6

transmission coordination authorities (e.g., WECC), state energy offices, and

7

transmission system operators to identify any transmission issues associated

8

with the proposed project (e.g., capacity and land use considerations).

9

10

• Coordination with railroad industry to determine potential for impacts on

11

railroad ROWs and railroad operations.

12

13

• Coordination with any potentially affected grazing permittee/lessee to discuss

14

how the proposed project may affect grazing operations and address possible

15

alternatives, as well as mitigation and compensation strategies.

16

17

• Coordination with existing ROW holders to determine potential impacts on

18

existing BLM authorizations.

19

20

• Coordination with the owner of any federal mining claims and/or mineral

21

leases located within the boundaries of the proposed project to determine the

22

potential for impacts on mining claims and/or mineral leases and discuss ways

23

to avoid, minimize, or mitigate such impacts.

24

25

2.2.2.3.2 Variance Process Determination

26

27

Final Solar PEIS

2-55

July 2012